MOBILE, Alabama -- The strange mix of circumstances surrounding BP’s oil spill claims process have gotten even murkier lately as the British oil giant began buying ads in newspapers decrying the process rife with fraud.

The dispute has largely played out in a Louisiana federal court, lengthening an already complex case involving what has been called the worst environmental disaster in American history. A federal judge approved the class-action settlement to avoid the copious amount of lawsuits that could have been filed. But settling the case, which seemed to be on track, has taken a turn for the worse.

In court, BP’s lawyers have sought to revise the settlement agreement signed off on in early 2012 by U.S District Judge Carl Barbier, arguing that the standard rewards questionable claimants with undeserved cash.

There are thousands of legitimate claims that meet the standard, said Deepwater Horizon Claims Center Administrator Patrick Juneau, many of which they are required by law to approve. And the amount of fraud, despite objections from BP officials, Juneau said is miniscule.

In Alabama, there have been just over 250,000 claims filed. Out of those 63,500 were deemed eligible for payment and 52,000 were denied, according to Juneau.

“Very few cases have been prosecuted. The number is not a great number, but are we alert to that and are we attuned to that -- absolutely,” Juneau said. “The object is not to pay a fraudulent claim; who would want to do that? Certainly not us.”

Juneau, who is the court-appointed administrator for the claims program, took over the post from Ken Feinberg in August 2012. His steering of the program has been marked by allegations by BP that the current claims process awards claims even if their legitimacy is questionable.

After Judge Barbier denied a motion in November 2013 that would have changed the standard based on showing a “causal-nexus” between the oil spill and a claim, BP has put into action a publicity campaign, running advertisements in The New York Times, The Washington Post and on the political news website Politico.

Geoff Morrell, a spokesman for BP, said in a prepared statement that the company plans to continue fighting interpretations of the settlement agreement that are “inconsistent” with the “intent of the parties and the law.”

“Our ads are intended to keep our stakeholders informed about the serious concerns we've been raising for months now about the way in which the settlement agreement is being implemented.” Morrell said.

“We hope that in focusing our stakeholders’ attention on the absurd awards made by the claims program for alleged losses with no apparent relation to the spill, they will understand why the litigation over the settlement continues and the extent to which the company’s commitment to the Gulf is being twisted and exploited.”

BP’s change of heart has not sat well with Judge Barbier.

“Frankly, it is surprising that the same counsel who represented BP during the settlement negotiations, participated in drafting the final settlement agreement, and then strenuously advocated for approval of the settlement before this court,” Barbier wrote in Nov. 22, denying a BP motion that would have changed the standard for evaluating claims.

In the motion, Barbier referenced an email exchange between BP’s lawyers officials from the Deepwater Horizon Claims Center. In September 2012, they were presented with a hypothetical claim to evaluate to determine whether the person would be eligible for payment.

The case involved an attenuated claim by an imaginary accounting firm that lost one of its managers, who was out on medical leave during the same time the company experienced a decline in revenue.

Lost income increased when the manager returned. “Is that lost recoverable?” a claims official wrote.

At the time, BP’s lawyers agreed to pay one such claimant.

“The Settlement Agreement’s plain text requires the Claims Administrator to assess whether a claimant’s alleged injuries are traceable to the oil spill before authorizing payment, so as to prevent the wrongful payment of claims unrelated to the spill,” Morrell said in a prepared statement Tuesday.

But Juneau sees it differently, insisting that he is bound by a system of BP’s own making.

“If that hypothetical appeared today we are processing that as a valid claim,” Juneau said. “We make the adjudication as we read the agreement.”